scholarly journals Peripheral Neuromodulation for the Management of Headache

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Urits ◽  
Ruben Schwartz ◽  
Daniel Smoots ◽  
Lindsey Koop ◽  
Suhitha Veeravelli ◽  
...  

Context: Neuromodulation is an expanding field of study for headache treatment to reduce pain by targeting structures within the nervous system that are commonly involved in headache pathophysiology, such as the vagus nerve (VNS), occipital nerves, or sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) for stimulation. Pharmaceutical medical therapies for abortive and prophylactic treatment, such as triptans, NSAIDs, beta-blockers, TCAs, and antiepileptics, are effective for some individuals, but the role that technology plays in investigating other therapeutic modalities is essential. Peripheral neuromodulation has gained popularity and FDA approval for use in treating certain headaches and migraine headache conditions, particularly in those who are refractory to treatment. Early trials found FDA approved neurostimulatory implant devices, including Cephaly and SpringTMS, improved patient-oriented outcomes with reductions in headaches per month (frequency) and severity. Evidence Acquisition: This was a narrative review. The sources for this review are as follows: Searching on PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, and ScienceDirect from 1990 - 2019 using keywords: Peripheral Neuromodulation, Headache, vagus nerve, occipital nerves, sphenopalatine ganglion. Results: The first noninvasive neurostimulator device approved for migraine treatment was the Cefaly device, an external trigeminal nerve stimulation device (e-TNS) that transcutaneously excites the supratrochlear and supraorbital branches of the ophthalmic nerve. The second noninvasive neurostimulation device receiving FDA approval was the single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulator, SpringTMS, positioned at the occiput to treat migraine with aura. GammaCore is a handheld transcutaneous vagal nerve stimulator applied directly to the neck at home by the patient for treatment of cluster headache (CH) and migraine. Several other devices are in development for the treatment of headaches and target headache evolution at different levels and inputs. The Scion device is a caloric vestibular stimulator (CVS) which interfaces with the user through a set of small cones resting in the ear canal on either side and held in place by modified over-ear headphones. The pulsante SPG Microstimulator is a patient-controlled device implanted in the patient’s upper jaw via an hour-long oral procedure to target the sphenopalatine ganglion. The occipital nerve stimulator (ONS) is an invasive neuromodulation device for headache treatment that consists of an implanted pulse generator on the chest wall connected to a subcutaneous lead with 4 - 8 electrodes that is tunneled the occiput. Conclusions: The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the efficacy, preliminary outcomes, and limitations of neurostimulatory implants available for use in the US and those pending further development.

2020 ◽  
Vol 99 (7) ◽  

Introduction: Vagus nerve stimulation is a palliative treatment for patients with refractory epilepsy to reduce the frequency and intensity of seizures. A bipolar helical electrode is placed around the left vagus nerve at the cervical level and is connected to the pulse generator placed in a subcutaneous pocket, most commonly in the subclavian region. Methods: Between March 1998 and October 2019, we performed 196 procedures related to the vagal nerve stimulation at the Neurosurgery Department in Motol University Hospital. Of these, 126 patients were vagal nerve stimulator implantation surgeries for intractable epilepsy. The cases included 69 female and 57 male patients with mean age at the time of the implantation surgery 22±12.4 years (range 2.1−58.4 years). Results: Nine patients (7.1%) were afflicted by complications related to implantation. Surgical complications included postoperative infection in 1.6%, VNS-associated arrhythmias in 1.6%, jugular vein bleeding in 0.8% and vocal cord paresis in 2.4%. One patient with vocal cord palsy also suffered from severe dysphagia. One patient (0.8%) did not tolerate extra stimulation with magnet due to a prolonged spasm in his throat. The extra added benefit of vagus stimulation in one patient was a significant reduction of previously regular severe headaches. Conclusion: Vagus nerve stimulation is an appropriate treatment for patients with drug-resistant epilepsy who are not candidates for focal resective surgery. Implantation of the vagus nerve stimulator is a relatively safe operative procedure.


Neurology ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 84 (12) ◽  
pp. 1249-1253 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. D. Nesbitt ◽  
J. C. A. Marin ◽  
E. Tompkins ◽  
M. H. Ruttledge ◽  
P. J. Goadsby

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Imad Libbus ◽  
Scott R. Stubbs ◽  
Scott T. Mazar ◽  
Scott Mindrebo ◽  
Bruce H. KenKnight ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS) delivers Autonomic Regulation Therapy (ART) for heart failure (HF), and has been associated with improvement in cardiac function and heart failure symptoms. VNS is delivered using an implantable pulse generator (IPG) and lead with electrodes placed around the cervical vagus nerve. Because HF patients may receive concomitant cardiac defibrillation therapy, testing was conducted to determine the effect of defibrillation (DF) on the VNS system. Methods DF testing was conducted on three ART IPGs (LivaNova USA, Inc.) according to international standard ISO14708-1, which evaluated whether DF had any permanent effects on the system. Each IPG was connected to a defibrillation pulse generator and subjected to a series of high-energy pulses. Results The specified series of pulses were successfully delivered to each of the three devices. All three IPGs passed factory electrical tests, and interrogation confirmed that software and data were unchanged from the pre-programmed values. No shifts in parameters or failures were observed. Conclusions Implantable VNS systems were tested for immunity to defibrillation, and were found to be unaffected by a series of high-energy defibrillation pulses. These results suggest that this VNS system can be used safely and continue to function after patients have been defibrillated.


2021 ◽  
Vol 71 ◽  
pp. 110193
Author(s):  
Arthur Chyan ◽  
Sangeeta Kumaraswami ◽  
Suryanarayana Pothula

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 83-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandi Lam ◽  
Yimo Lin ◽  
Daniel J. Curry ◽  
Gaddum D. Reddy ◽  
Peter C. Warnke

2009 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 383-387 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naoaki Tanaka ◽  
Elizabeth A. Thiele ◽  
Joseph R. Madsen ◽  
Blaise F. Bourgeois ◽  
Steven M. Stufflebeam

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document